Hi Actually I think the naming convention should be:
send = for in only sendWithHeader sendWithHeaders sendAndReceive = for in out sendAndReceiveWithHeader sendAndReceiveWithHeaders Its more intuitive than currently send = for in only request = for in out However what about the "body" method we can do it like sendAndReceiveBody sendAndReceiveBodyWithHeader sendAndReceiveBodyWithHeaders or sendBodyAndReceiveWihHeader sendBodyAndReceiveWithHeaders I prefer the former as its sending a body and receving a body. Any thoughts on this, as we still have time to for this API change before 2.0 is ready for release. However the clock is ticking!!! On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Claus Ibsen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Ryan Gardner <[email protected]> wrote: >> The requestBody method makes sense (it requests a body) - but >> "requestBodyAndHeader" and "requestBodyAndHeaders" etc methods make less >> sense - because I'm only requesting one thing (the body). >> >> maybe "requestBodyWithHeader" makes more sense? for the "sendBodyAndHeader" >> methods, it makes sense because you are sending two things (the body and the >> header) >> >> although, perhaps I'm just going crazy? > No it makes sense. You only get the body as reply. > > But to make it consistent the sendBodyAndHeader could also be named as > sendBodyWithHeader. > >> >> Ryan >> > > > > -- > Claus Ibsen > Apache Camel Committer > > Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com > Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ > Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus > Apache Camel Reference Card: > http://refcardz.dzone.com/refcardz/enterprise-integration > -- Claus Ibsen Apache Camel Committer Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus Apache Camel Reference Card: http://refcardz.dzone.com/refcardz/enterprise-integration
